This is a discussion on Amaya. Good for the game - or bad? within the online poker forums, in the Poker News section; As you guys may be aware, I stepped away from poker for quite a while after Full Tilt hit one or two challenges with their

As you guys may be aware, I stepped away from poker for quite a while after Full Tilt hit one or two challenges with their leadership style, although I did eventually manage to retrieve my funds from them. At that point in time PokerStars were far and away the best poker site, not just in their amount of traffic but in terms of a total commitment to quality customer service and trying to give everybody as pleasant a playing experience with them as possible.

I wasn't keeping up with poker news during the time that I was away, but I think it might be fair to say that PokerStars aren't quite as adored by the poker community now as they were at the time that I left. In fact, some members here seem to unleash personal attacks on any other members who don't loathe PokerStars the same way that they do. They have reduced the number of website affiliates, they have increased rake, in fact they have done many of the things that you would expect a company owned by shareholders to do in an effort to maximise returns on the money that those shareholders have invested in them.

Quite frankly, I'm not particularly bothered what poker pros or players that make a living from grinding think about the changes, they have little relevance to my life as I'm a casual player and I can see why they have an axe to grind about these changes. They're quite clearly biased. As Daniel Negreanu said: "Winning players are killing poker". I assume that he was referring to online poker, because seeing "ordinary" people winning enormous sums of money obviously attracts a lot of new players to the game.

I read somewhere, can't remember where, that because Amaya is a publicly quoted company, with shareholders, this means that they are more likely to be able to swing a deal for online poker to return to the USA. Most people here would probably see that as a good thing? I certainly would.

PokersStars did a trememendous job in helping to build up the worldwide interest in, and following for, poker. A lot of their big tournaments still go out on TV all around the world. Now poker is well established, they have a dominant position in the online poker industry and their shareholders want them to cash in on that. They're not there to mollycoddle multi-tablers and poker pros, they're there to earn a good return for their investors.

Obviously they are going to lose players, so we might see other poker sites gaining more prominence, especially now that they seem less customer-service-orientated. Full Tilt is also now part of the Amaya stable, but there are plenty of other poker sites available. Check out this page if you would like to find some more sites to sign up with, and help to support CardsChat by doing so:

So guys, what do you think - is Amaya good for the game of poker or is it damaging it?

#2

25th November 2014, 2:21 AM

onemorechance [2,847]

I'm in a similar position to you, coming back to the game after some time away.

It's probably been a good six or seven months since I closely followed what was happening in the 'poker world', and in that time the general of view of Stars both here and on 2p2 has gone from almost universally positive to pretty sceptical at the very least in the direction it's going. I'm not saying I blindly follow mob mentality, but it strikes me as significant change in general attitude and is why I've started back elsewhere, when previously I don't think I'd have considered playing anywhere but Stars

#3

25th November 2014, 3:35 AM

NoWuckingFurries [3,821]

Poker at: FTP

Game: NLHE

I don't play at PS myself, but it's for a far more basic reason and one which I think was already in force long before Amaya became involved. We have three recreational poker players in this house, I have a high-spec PC and work funny shifts, the other members of the family have a laptop and a netbook respectively, so when I am at work they like to play poker on a good PC with a hard-wired internet connection instead of wifi.

PS seem to put spyware on your PC (which I assume that many sites will), then when you go to play with a second account on the same PC they stop that second account from accessing a whole range of benefits, such as when I tried to use their poker school. I'm sure they think that they are very clever but I don't like the feeling that I'm being spied on. At that point I decided to do without them in my life, especially as their astronomy-orientated freerolls are such a waste of time.

#4

25th November 2014, 4:21 AM

mendiolacubicle [134]

Online Poker at: PokerStars

Game: Holdem

Overall in my opinion it's a global expansion which means more players coming in from places of "opportunity".

I'm still very much positive with how events will turn out for PokerStars under Amaya, hopefully our US brothers an. sisters would be able to play in PS really soon.

#5

25th November 2014, 1:12 PM

Syltan [612]

Poker at: Pokerstars

Game: holdem

I think it was followed by many changes, the main increase rake in the cache and tournaments, and selling only a farce that would pay less taxes!!

#6

26th November 2014, 4:38 AM

IvanShovski [580]

re: Poker & Amaya. Good for the game - or bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoWuckingFurries

PS seem to put spyware on your PC (which I assume that many sites will), then when you go to play with a second account on the same PC they stop that second account from accessing a whole range of benefits, such as when I tried to use their poker school. I'm sure they think that they are very clever but I don't like the feeling that I'm being spied on. At that point I decided to do without them in my life, especially as their astronomy-orientated freerolls are such a waste of time.

PokerStars doesn't need to use spyware to determine that multiple accounts are using the same device or IP address to connect to their servers. They use this information to protect all players from the threat posed by multi-accounters, and I don't think that you should be too concerned about it.

A change of ownership seemed to be essential if PokerStars were ever to be allowed back into the U.S. market. For this reason, the purchase by Amaya would seem to be good for poker.

#7

26th November 2014, 11:38 AM

veltins [977]

Poker at: pokerstars

Game: both

i guess it s good for amaya , not really for poker . Amaya has aquired PS and ft to make much more Money . they dont care about Players n giving back too much.

#8

1st December 2014, 1:52 PM

theRaven68 [1,120]

Online Poker at: available

Game: nl holdem

good or bad, it depends.
grinders are affected with changes and casual players are not, and dont forget about potential of old/new market in the USA...and they will not play only poker

#9

2nd December 2014, 1:00 AM

rogerdelpk [218]

Amaya cares only about profit, not about poker........

#10

2nd December 2014, 2:14 PM

Teofealter [55]

Online Poker at: Pokerstars

Game: Hold'em

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogerdelpk

Amaya cares only about profit, not about poker........

Roger that, as with any other BUSINESS!!! The bottom line is Profit.

#11

2nd December 2014, 2:17 PM

NoWuckingFurries [3,821]

Poker at: FTP

Game: NLHE

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teofealter

Roger that, as with any other BUSINESS!!! The bottom line is Profit.

To a certain extent that is true, but the previous owners of Pokerstars appeared to be totally focussed on giving players a great experience and their customer service was superb, which in turn helped the rapid expansion of online poker. Obviously they made profits along the way.

#12

2nd December 2014, 6:46 PM

curtinsea [483]

re: Poker & Amaya. Good for the game - or bad?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoWuckingFurries

To a certain extent that is true, but the previous owners of Pokerstars appeared to be totally focussed on giving players a great experience and their customer service was superb, which in turn helped the rapid expansion of online poker. Obviously they made profits along the way.

Previously, Pokerstars was privately held. This made the owners quite rich(er). Amaya, on the other hand, is a publicly held corporation, who has many, many, many owners it must answer to, and needs to be far more profitable. It also has a lot of debt to service now as well.

Calculated decisions are being made to increase the margins.

#13

8th December 2014, 3:41 AM

NoWuckingFurries [3,821]

Poker at: FTP

Game: NLHE

I think that a lot of players in the USA would be delighted to see Pokerstars return, regardless of the controversy that they seem to be causing.

#14

8th December 2014, 4:21 PM

A2345Razz [1,187]

Online Poker at: Merge

Game: Razz

Clearly the answer is getting worse and worse for the game.

Whether they are better or worse than other operators is really besides the point; Amayastars has clearly turned the corner and is looking for short term margin building over long term health for the game.

If they change course and start reinvesting a bunch of money to initiate new programs to support micro ring games or attract new players, etc, I will be the first to talk about it.

#15

8th December 2014, 5:12 PM

TeUnit [1,626]

Poker at: PokerStars

Game: holdem, sng,

I think its good and bad for the game, as they continue to increase rake it should help traffic at the smaller sites, and hopefully these guys have their eye on the prize and push for a federal solution

#16

10th December 2014, 1:01 AM

da_goat [81]

Online Poker at: Americas Car

Game: Omaha

If they will somehow see that you need to throw us players a bone and not get too greedy, it would be good for all parties.

#17

10th December 2014, 12:50 PM

DonV73 [673]

Poker at: PokerStars

Game: NLHE,PLO,+

My opinion is that it is not good for the game, based on first changes they made since buying ps. But maybe it is too quick of a conclusion.

#18

12th December 2014, 5:02 PM

arizoney [385]

Online Poker at: usa sites

Game: all

re: Poker & Amaya. Good for the game - or bad?

http://www.cardschat.com/news/amaya-gaming-canada-raided-8788 this might not be a big deal but is this enough to keep them out of the real money markets for poker in the US at least i think it makes them a bad actor now. so if it does we can write them off but im no legal analyst but i wonder what is now in store for these people lol. just goes to show if it isnt one thing its another

#19

15th December 2014, 12:08 PM

sashwerter [19]

Poker at: Betsafe

Game: holdem

If they reduce the payment for the status Sn or SNE and the money sent for promotions and bonuses for other players, it was excellent

#20

23rd December 2014, 8:47 PM

Mark Gavr [94]

Online Poker at: PokerStars

Game: Holden

It seems to me that Amaya is not thinking about the game of poker, it is more concerned about their profits ....

#21

24th December 2014, 9:35 PM

Dagano [32]

Poker at: Full Tilt

Game: NL HOLDEM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Gavr

It seems to me that Amaya is not thinking about the game of poker, it is more concerned about their profits ....

100% agree...

#22

24th December 2014, 10:16 PM

YouPay4MyCrack [81]

Online Poker at: Full Flush

Game: holdem

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoWuckingFurries

As you guys may be aware, I stepped away from poker for quite a while after Full Tilt hit one or two challenges with their leadership style, although I did eventually manage to retrieve my funds from them. At that point in time PokerStars were far and away the best poker site, not just in their amount of traffic but in terms of a total commitment to quality customer service and trying to give everybody as pleasant a playing experience with them as possible.

I wasn't keeping up with poker news during the time that I was away, but I think it might be fair to say that PokerStars aren't quite as adored by the poker community now as they were at the time that I left. In fact, some members here seem to unleash personal attacks on any other members who don't loathe PokerStars the same way that they do. They have reduced the number of website affiliates, they have increased rake, in fact they have done many of the things that you would expect a company owned by shareholders to do in an effort to maximise returns on the money that those shareholders have invested in them.

Quite frankly, I'm not particularly bothered what poker pros or players that make a living from grinding think about the changes, they have little relevance to my life as I'm a casual player and I can see why they have an axe to grind about these changes. They're quite clearly biased. As Daniel Negreanu said: "Winning players are killing poker". I assume that he was referring to online poker, because seeing "ordinary" people winning enormous sums of money obviously attracts a lot of new players to the game.

I read somewhere, can't remember where, that because Amaya is a publicly quoted company, with shareholders, this means that they are more likely to be able to swing a deal for online poker to return to the USA. Most people here would probably see that as a good thing? I certainly would.

PokersStars did a trememendous job in helping to build up the worldwide interest in, and following for, poker. A lot of their big tournaments still go out on TV all around the world. Now poker is well established, they have a dominant position in the online poker industry and their shareholders want them to cash in on that. They're not there to mollycoddle multi-tablers and poker pros, they're there to earn a good return for their investors.

Obviously they are going to lose players, so we might see other poker sites gaining more prominence, especially now that they seem less customer-service-orientated. Full Tilt is also now part of the Amaya stable, but there are plenty of other poker sites available. Check out this page if you would like to find some more sites to sign up with, and help to support CardsChat by doing so:

http://www.cardschat.com/poker-site-reviews.php

So guys, what do you think - is Amaya good for the game of poker or is it damaging it?

I'm in all of those sites except Sportsbetting and Sportsboook, but play most on BetOnline and Full Flush. I miss the days of Hero Poker and missed out on the days of PokerStars in the USA.

#23

30th December 2014, 3:40 AM

hulinada [147]

Poker at: PokerStars

Game: holdem OmAHA

When they raised the rake, they knew that we would not like it. We still have nowhere else to play, so it makes no sense to pretend that we are somewhere leave.

#24

30th December 2014, 8:41 PM

ccocco [460]

Online Poker at: pokerstars

Game: game to all

re: Poker & Amaya. Good for the game - or bad?

Today day 10 years ago there was so many online poker rooms, knows that PS so I always have promotions and joins Internet sites to promote tournaments, would be good for poker as Daniel Negreanu, who has not said much money for a winner. you have more winners to hand over well among many players positions. and so attract people.

#25

30th December 2014, 8:51 PM

horizon12 [4,130]

For US players well, now has a chance to enter the US market and to legalize poker in many states..

#26

31st December 2014, 2:22 PM

NoWuckingFurries [3,821]

Online Poker at: FTP

Game: NLHE

Quote:

Originally Posted by hulinada

When they raised the rake, they knew that we would not like it. We still have nowhere else to play, so it makes no sense to pretend that we are somewhere leave.

You speak for yourself. There are plenty of other poker sites for me to play at.

#27

25th January 2015, 4:22 PM

greedisgood [42]

Poker at: pokerstars

Game: holdem

They will gain a lot of extra income by introducing sports&casinogames(news post last month) and probably the winrates for regs will go up.

as for the customer service, it's part of the pokerstar brand and they will keep improving it. they will keep improving their client to stay top of the segment. but they will increase rake as soon as they feel they added enough value to justify the higher price. They tought they did with the new client, and while the rake increase is postponed I believe it will increase once they added enough recreational players through the sport&casinogames.

For the business people/economics/investors among us, I would love to discuss the stock of Amaya so feel free to send me a pm Don't want to spam Nowuckingfurries's topic with stocktalk!

#28

11th February 2015, 4:54 AM

mxinger [3]

Game: hold'em

Of course a business looks to make a profit. That's why they're in business. The purchase of PS is a good move - and it's obvious that they have the superior product, as everyone tries so very hard to keep them out (New Jersey, and California - I'm looking at you). Time will tell if they can get a foothold here...in the meantime, they'll do OK in the REST OF THE WORLD.

#29

11th February 2015, 1:10 PM

jsh169 [812]

Game: holdem

No its not good for the game. I know alot of you are asking for regulation, but that is going to be even worse. Every edge you had just gets smaller by the day. The taxation on the companies are going to turn the fees onto us, meaning less rakeback or even none eventually. I can see a casual player winning a multi table tournament for a decent amount to get taxed on it, to only lose it back with in a few months, will wonder what he is doing, getting taxed while not even winning.